Informed Decisions, Parents Know Best, and Other Mythical Creatures (II of III)
By Chris Heuer on Fri 3 Aug 2007 |
Email This Post
Perhaps the most prevalent myth in this community is the myth of hearing parents (or deaf parents for that matter) who “know what is best” for their deaf children.
Nobody can “know” what the outcome of a given decision will be. Consider the simple act of striking a match. More often than not it will probably light. But sometimes it won’t. And sometimes it won’t even after seven tries in a row with seven different matches. If a match doesn’t light, you can try to explain the failure by taking into account the age of the matches, whether or not they were wet, or whether or not the day was windy. Your analysis might even be dead-on accurate!
All of this takes nothing away from the fact that you can’t know what will happen before the act itself. The fact that you’re a parent does not exempt you from this truth—no more than being the President of the United States would exempt you from this truth. You can predict and extrapolate and assume. You can hope and wish and expect. You can gather information and factor into your consideration as many variables as possible. In the end, the match will light or it won’t. You’ll “know” after you try and not before. And even after you do, you’ll still have no way of knowing whether or not the next one will light.
My aim here is not to argue about what’s morally right. My aim is to point out that if the President of the United States says “I know this is going to work!” and his aide replies “Sir, I wouldn’t bet the budget on that,” what this usually means is that sometimes things don’t work the way that they’re supposed to. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the aide obviously now hates the President of the United States. It doesn’t necessarily mean he’s a traitor, an extremist, or a rabble-rousing troublemaker who should be shot for treason.
But that’s not the way much of the world thinks, and it’s not the way many in this community think. Parents are increasingly becoming politically untouchable, exempt from any and all criticism; solely by virtue of the fact that they are parents. If they make a mistake, they have the right to make that mistake, no matter what. It’s not appropriate for you to say otherwise. It’s not appropriate for you to even question their decisions, let alone challenge them. This is their kid and not yours. It’s their decision in the end.
These kinds of responses might seem empathic, the first line of defense for embattled parents, but they are not. They are responses of extremism, and they can be incredibly destructive. The more untouchable something becomes—be that something an individual, a topic, a group, or an ideology—the less likely it becomes that people will chance posing a question or challenge at all. The punishment for doing so is too severe. Why risk it? Thus we set up parents who can’t possibly “know” to become parents who do, not because they actually know anything, but because so many others are too scared to publicly state otherwise.
This is the exact same type of mentality that turned everyone who supported the U.F.G. protest at Gallaudet into a “Deaf Absolutist,” with no individual range of beliefs or tolerances whatsoever (you can check many of the letters printed the editorial section of the Washington Post for “proof”). Meanwhile, everyone who did not support the protest was “not deaf enough;” also with no range of individual beliefs or tolerances. And everyone who challenges a given parent’s decision is obviously a rude, mean jerk who has no kids of his own—otherwise he’d know how hard it is. . .
When did it become such a crime to label and categorize things accurately? Parents can’t know, but they can guess. The word “guess” might not be as absolute or as all-powerful as the word “know,” but is that so bad? Precious little that is human is absolute. When I have a kid I’m pretty sure that I’m going to end up guessing at what’s best for him all of the time. If someone says “Dude, are you sure you’re doing the right thing?” I’m simply going to reply “Well I sure as hell hope so!” Exactly how will that basic game plan make me a bad parent? I don’t think it’s wrong to admit you’re scared when you’re scared, or that you’re fallible, or that you sometimes second-guess your decisions. I think you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone on this planet who doesn’t feel those things at times. I would resent people who get up in my face and assume that I’m lazy or blind when the truth is that I exhaustively pored over all of the research I could find. But if someone cared enough about how my kid turned out to hold protests and and pass out leaflettes in order to make sure that I received information I might have missed or discounted the first time around, a part of me would be thankful that my kid had so many people looking out for him. Even if I didn’t agree with that information.
While we’re on the subject of labeling and categorizing things accurately, here is a new question: Why commit what is often the logical fallacy of saying “all” when what’s much more defensible is “most” or “some” or “many?” It’s an absolute statement to say that “The parents have the final say in the end,” or even that “Parents should have the final say in the end.” Really? All parents? I have met many over the course of my career. And I thought many were wonderful. They left me in complete awe of the amount of committment they felt for their children. This applies to parents who went both the oral route and the ASL one. I perhaps vehemently disagreed with some (or even many) of their decisions, but that alone never caused me to doubt their love.
On the other hand I have also met parents who I thought were horrifying. I know of parents who are serving time in prison. I knew parents who weren’t serving time in prison, yet I still thought they were horrifying. I knew parents who are no longer allowed to even see their children. I’ve met parents whom I’m pretty sure even other parents would hesitate to leave a deaf child alone with.
Where does this admission leave us? Why should it reduce the discussion to a case of comparing apples and oranges? Why should it make me the bad guy or invalidate my neutrality or separate me from reality? The only fact that’s absolute in the end is the fact that somebody will have to make decisions concerning a deaf child, or else nobody will. It doesn’t necessarily have to be the biological parents, or the guardians, or the foster parents, or the adoptive parents. Sometimes a kid goes through all of these before he’s placed in an environment that’s safe and nurturing, and it’s entirely possible that he’ll rarely be placed in an environment he considers to be safe or nurturing. Sometimes the odds are quite high that he doesn’t have anyone who is really looking out for him or who gives a damn about him, even when he’s still living with his actual, biological parents!
I can’t get behind blind idealism—and that’s what true absolutism is. It smells too much like blind denial. When you say “all” or even imply it, make sure you mean it. Make sure you know who and what you’re talking about. If you say “all,” make sure you’re ready to attack or defend a whole range of real, live individuals. Their distinctions tend to blur out of focus when your eyes are busy trying to see everyone at once.
But “everyone at once” is the very type of label that makes a group absolute. And that’s exactly what their distinctions separate them from.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
Are you telling that we should be flexible about what happens to the deaf children because we simply can not know everything about specific situation of a specific child and his/her parent? If so, I get you and agree with you. However, does that not behoove us to try to “light the match” as a habit and be ready to adapt if “the match doesn’t light up”?
The root of this controversy is parental choice. No matter what, the parent has the final say in how the child is raised…up to a point where definitions of neglect and abuse begin.
That said, we want to give all parents the information we feel they need. As deaf adults who have been through the experience of AG Bell-style education, we feel the parents need our input and would think differently if we could convince them of the urgency of our ideas.
Sweden is said to have the principle that sign language is a necessary part of the child’s education and apparently has enforcement of that principle. We need to see how that came about in a previously oral country and the arguments they are making.
Now, if we were to have the Swedish model here, we would then be able to sit back and figure all the variants of results and how to fine tune the varieties of approaches to fit each type of child. With all possibilities covered in a comprehensive environment, no child would be left out.
It should be my concern if a parent becomes brainwashed by a flawed ideology for the deaf child’s language/education that leads its consequence or ramification into our Deaf Community. Over 50% of the Deaf people in the community have gone through this flawed education philosophy that mingles among us.
We want to education the parents the right ideology of the proper acquisition language for a deaf child before the other flawed ideology organization gets the chance to ruin the deaf child’s potential to learn how to learn with a visual language.
Yes, I agree that the parents have the final say at the end but they had to be educated first before they made the choice. And who always cut in line ahead of us to get to these parents?…..AGBell and its cronies, who else?
John F. Egbert
Bottom line, John. The rights belong to the parents of a deaf/hh child regarding communication and educational decisions. As long as they make an *informed* decision, then they shouldn’t get any arguments from us. None whatsoever. Otherwise what you’d be saying is that parents do not have that right. People need to watch where they tread waters in those areas.
Mike, I disagree. Too extreme, and untrue. Questioning their decision is NOT the same thing as saying they don’t have the right to make it.
Chris, as long as the parents make an *informed* decision based on the information you give them, based on information AGBell gives them, based on information given to by the medical community, the educational community, interview results from deaf and hearing parents, etc..etc..the full gamut necessary to get the full spectrum of available information before making that crucial decision.
Now, to question a parents’ informed decision, after all that they have done with their homework, is tantamount on saying that they have no basis to make that kind of particular decision. Hence, they have no rights to decide on their own merits on what they feel is right, intellectually and emotionally. This is why I offered a caveat saying that people need to watch where they tread waters in those areas. You’d be basically questioning their rights to make their own informed decision by saying what they decided was wrong. They will perceive that as an affront to their decision making process. It’d be an infringement on their part. Let them decide. Don’t question their fully informed decision result. You see, some people seem to have a problem with the very notion of letting people make their own informed decision when it doesn’t go their way.
So you want the parents to what, take a test? How do you plan to measure their “informedness” level?
The fact is that only Deaf people have been consumers of “deaf educational methods” and therefore are the only people who can provide true feedback to the system. Otherwise they just keep hitting and missing.
And no, Mike, questioning a decision is not saying someone has no right to make a decision. It’s questioning. If I question someone’s decision to buy porterhouse steak rather than sirloin, I am merely looking for information.
I find it ironic you make this distinction right after you say parents should make informed decisions. If you do not question their decision, how do you know it’s informed?
Joseph,
I agree with you on this count.
Well-pointed!
I asked the WFD’s former third-term presidentSociologist Yerker Andersson directly about sign language in Sweden. Here is his reply as of July 2007:
“I have to ask some Swedish leaders to give me more updated information. - What I know of today is 1) that Swedish Sign Language is required at all the schools for the deaf in Sweden and 2) that the Swedish parliament has expressed its preference for “minority language” rather than “linguistic minority” but has not made any decision yet. All the schools for the deaf in Sweden are expected to follow the same educational requirements. The organization of parents of deaf and hard of hearing children still maintains a close relationship with the federation of the deaf.”
So I shall keep you posted about any new development
Sociologist Andersson in the future.
McConnell, you said…..
“Otherwise what you’d be saying is that parents do not have that right”.
I never said that parents do not have that right!!!!
I said that the parents should be educated and make the right choice.
And it is my concern that an organization misleads the parents to make a choice which leads to the 50%+ of the deaf people in the community not happy about it. Go out and talk to the community about their experience growing up.
John Egbert
I didn’t say you said that. Did you see that I put the words “otherwise you’d”? It’s an “if and then” scenario comment. Calm down, please.
Chris, maybe it would make you feel better to know that parents’ authority over their children isn’t absolute. One can always call Child Services on these parents if one feels that the parent(s) isn’t/aren’t doing their duty by their child/ren.
And since I’m a mother of a 22-month-old Deaf son, my husband and I are always conscious that if anybody didn’t agree or didn’t like what we were doing with our son, all they have to do is to call Child Services on us and put us through a lot of trouble with them (and in worst-case scenario, could potentially cause us to lose our son!).
I agree with you (up to a point) that absolutes aren’t necessarily always a good thing.
But in case of parents and children…I am reminded of a discussion my husband and I had with a friend some months ago in which she said something like, “I am not the kind of person who makes decisions about someone else. I couldn’t do that to a child!” And I told her, “Look, I understand what you are saying, but the reality is, when you have a child, you are forced to make decisions for the child from the moment you become pregnant…i.e., what doctor to choose during your pregnancy, what to eat, what to drink, what tests to take and so on.
This continues until the child is born. Then it becomes, Do I breast feed the child or do I use formula? What kind of crib do I buy? What clothes do I put on my child?
The decision making on behalf of your child goes on and on and on.
Chris, I understand what you are saying, but I do think you are somewhat being naive…as only a non-parent can be. I used to think like you, until I had my own child. Then I understood that by virtue of giving birth to a human being, I was given the awesome responsibility of taking care of a human being who would be helpless for the first few years. Then once my little human being got to the point where he wasn’t helpless anymore, it would then be my job to guide him (i.e., values, manners, mores, etc etc) and hopefully, in the end, contribute another excellent Deaf human being to the world.
If not the parents, then who?
(An aside: I do agree with your point about hearing parents who claim that they know best when it comes to their Deaf children, when it is obvious that they don’t. In this case…call Child Services! wink)
I would like to say one thing… (with a nod to Michelle K.) we don’t have absolute power over our children. I quickly learned it when I went to my very first IEP meeting, after I learned my son had hearing loss (I say “hearing loss”, because he was born normal hearing and then he started losing it after the age of 2.) I asked that my son attended Rochester School for the Deaf and the request was abruptly rejected. Then the RSD audiologist and I argued for almost 4 hours (I was in the last month of pregnancy with my daughter and uncomfortable.) At the end, they said they would agree to my request only IF I brought the written note from my son’s primary doctor that the hearing loss was PROGRESSIVE (in NYS, deaf children with at least 50 dB hearing loss could attend a deaf school, up to the age of 5 years old and after 5 years old, the hearing loss goes up to 80 dB. At that time my son had 40-45 dB loss) AND if a slot in the “universal pre-kindergarten” class opened up, I was expected to pull my son out of RSD, no questions about it.
Grrrr… it was a very frustrating feeling, feeling like I had no power, like I had no voice as a parent. It was an awful feeling to realize that NYS “owned” my son and that there was nothing I could do about it. Of course, we moved to a different town where the school district was more flexible and my son and later on my daughter went to RSD for several years.
Mike, I’m replying to you here instead of under your response #86162 above because Karen’s response helps me clarify what I mean. Karen’s reply is not extreme and definitely not a case of comparing apples and oranges (though you did not accuse me of these things). Karen does not fit any of the criteria that I listed in Part II (and believe me I could have listed much more criteria) for showing why “parents” is not an absolute group. I presume that she’s not serving time in prison, nor does she abuse or neglect her children. Therefore both from the legal and moral categories of the question, she’s in good shape. But here she’s telling us all directly that she did NOT have the final say in deciding. The New York State Education Machine did (or at least they had a big part in it). So automatically the absolute argument “Parents have the final decision in the end” is incorrect. We have to keep in mind that there are many parents out there like her, and we also have to keep in mind that in this case I haven’t even brought out my examples of parents who no longer have any legal rights for a myriad of reasons…
So that’s one argument. Now for the other argument…
Using myself as a hypothetical example here because “the deaf community” is another absolute group that is little more than an illusion, since not all of its members will agree…
Questioning her decisions or even saying some are wrong in no shape or form impinges upon my belief that it’s much more her right to decide than it is mine (or even that it’s not within my power to decide for her at all). Of course I believe this! If I strongly disagreed with what she did, where do you think my growing frustration would be coming from?
The more it became my right to decide than it was hers, the more I’d simply stop arguing with her, because it would no longer be a question of reason. It would be a question of power.
Now I think I get what you’re saying. You seem to be implying that if a given sub-group within the overall deaf community strongly challenges a specific decision that a specific set of parents are making (for example, the DBC challenging only those parents who choose not to expose their deaf newborn to sign language–it would be absurd for them to challenge parents who DID expose their newborn to signs) then they’re implying that they believe that that specific group should not have the power to make the final decision for the child (because it would absurd for them to imply the same thing about parents who DID expose their child to signs).
If people specified like this instead of grossly overgeneralizing so much of the time, we’d be having much clearer arguments. But even if your argument had been akin to something like my interpretation above, I still would’ve disagreed, because it would’ve come down to a question of values. And it’s possible that the members of the DBC (or groups like it) would’ve held personal beliefs that fell along a range of agreement and disagreement on that particular issue.
One DBC protester, for example, might have indeed felt that if parents decided not to expose their child to Baby Signs, then that alone is moral grounds for taking their child away. Another protester might’ve stopped short at going that far, and believed instead that the some state agency should assume responsibility for making SURE that parents get all information, because A.G. Bell wasn’t getting it to them.
It’s much more probable that there’d be a range of belief, do you see what I’m getting at? This is why I believe that absolute categories represent mythological things. “Parents” are just different from each other in beliefs as are members of “the Deaf community.”
Let me know if I’m being clear, here…
Um, Chris. The decision I (and others) was talking about was in regard to deciding whether the child be fitted with a CI, a hearing aid, start signing, start talking, have him in an oral or aural program, put him in regular school with a mainstream program (or none at all), or put him in regular school using his auditory process alone, put him in a deaf school, use of Cued speech alone only, a combination thereof and so on. It wasn’t all about education, it’s the whole decision process regarding both communication and education.
Karen was still determined to put her son in to RSD and that took moving to another school district for that to happen. She still believed her decision was the correct one. No, Karen?
The problem was it was a technicality on the amount of hearing loss required but it was also in the grey area since her son’s hearing loss was a progressive one which would eventually go beyond the 50 dB loss range. In the end she prevailed in her decision to send her son to RSD. It all boils down to the ability of that child to perform. And if it can be shown successfully, well, then there shouldn’t be any arguments from anyone on that matter alone.
Yes, Mike, I see what you’re saying. The only point I’m making in this section of the series on “Mythical Creatures” is that in general we’re better off saying “most” or “some” or “many” or even (and this is my personal favorite, because it ensures greater accuracy, though it really kills your ability to drive home an argumentative point:) “X number of.” I’m going to reply to Curious Eyes below next. I hope you’ll read that.
Chris,
In regards to IEP, you’re right - parents do not have absolute decision making power. Every year, our IEP Specialist says, “Parents do not make the final say. It is the team decision that has the final say.”
Parents can appeal, just like the Amy Rowley case - whose parents took the case all way to U.S. Supreme Court and lost. The Rowley case is a classical example in that parents do not have the absolute power or the final say. They have rights, yes, but that’s all.
Cy, that isn’t true. The parents can sign the IEP in disagreement, and force it to go into stay-put, which means the school district can’t change anything until they come to a new agreement.
I know, because I get lectured on this allll the time from my family member who’s a professional advocate for deaf and hoh children in education.
Hi DP,
Technically yes, but based on things I personally have seen/heard about, it’s that “come to a new agreement” part of it that puts a dent in the absolute of “parents have the final say.” Unless of course you argue that a parent can pull his/her child out of a particular program because an agreement couldn’t be reached, and that constitutes as the “final say.” But that very act can be interpreted two ways… the parent has the final say because he or she pulled the child out of the program when an agreement couldn’t be reached, but because an agreement couldn’t be reached, the school itself must have had something to say, too.
In any case, the absolute starts showing a few cracks…
Well, yeah. The parents never have any absolute decisions over their children. They do have to follow laws.
But with the schools, the parents have more power than the schools would like them to have, or know about.
Nothing in life is absolute, except for death and taxes. ;)
Ha. And the inevitability that if you want to keep playing new Halo games, you’re going to have to keep upgrading your computer. But that’s a topic for another blog.
(-:
Karen, I am curious. Did you ever get the brochure that was titled, ‘Parental Rights Under IDEA’ or something like it? Because it is *federal* law that you receive it at least once a year (usually at your IEP) when you have a kid in special education.
Yes, I get the brochures all the time. If disagreement, due process is usually the next step.
Yeah, that’s usually the next step. But not always, I believe.
Making any decisions that affect a child’s life (or some children’s lives.) When I a deaf mom made the decision to mainstream my deaf son, pulling him out of the “world-class deaf school”, it was not done on a whim. It took a few years of researching, discussing with teachers, visiting schools, etc., before I finally took the risk. Then I held my breath and be ready to put him back into the deaf school if he started floundering… it did not happen, and he LOVED mainstreaming.
Any decisions I make regarding my children, I just pray for the best outcomes. I will not know if the decisions are positive or negative until later. Also, I pray that when my children are adults, they won’t come to me and blast at me for not making this or that decision.
John E., I take your words with a grain of salt. The majority of hearing parents I know do a lot of soul searching, researching, etc., before making any decisions when it comes to their deaf/hearing children. And at the end any parents would say, I made the best decision I could have made for my child… and it is true. NOT all deaf children are alike. I have two deaf children… and they are very different–my son who is more comfortable with speaking/listening and my daughter who is more at home with ASL. I cannot force my daughter to be like my son. I cannot force my son to love ASL. But the best I can do is to show the opportunities that BOTH worlds… hearing and deaf worlds… offer to them. I am not going to blame everything on AGBell, John. There are many factors outside AGBell that influence the decision making.
Exactly, Karen.
My mother back during the 60s had little information to go by since access to information was limited in the first place. But she in fact did her own personal due diligence on the subject of hearing loss, education, and communication after I was diagnosed with a hearing loss at age 2 and was fitted with a hearing aid well before I was three years old.
I quickly made use of my hearing aid and made progress enough so to be finally placed in an elementary school that had a special needs (ie oral/aural) program at the 2nd and 3rd grade before being finally placed in a regular school with no mainstream program that was within walking distance starting at the 4th grade onward. I attended regular schools since then maintaining a B to B+ grade average all the way through the 12th grade. Looking back I know that my mother made the best and, more importantly, correct decision regarding communication and education. There were signing proponents at the time (early 70s) who tried to get her to place me into a deaf school and how some educational professionals would say I would never progress intellectually beyond the 4th grade level because I had a hearing loss. But she knew what I was capable of on the ability to hear and understand spoken words without even looking.
I was thankful that she didn’t put me into any schools that had these deaf programs (ie signing). She was right in her decision and that the amount of hearing I had (still the same today) was best put to use and taken advantage of which helped develop my speaking and listening skills so remarkably you can see where it got me today. It also has to do with the fact that my word discrimination is in the 95 to 97% range that allowed me to adapt much easier in regular schools by listening alone.
I never suffered to such a degree as some people would like to make of it my language development because I didn’t sign or my mother didn’t sign early on. Rather it was because of the amount of hearing I had allowed me the use of my hearing aid so effectively. With my hearing aid I progressed rapidly to the point that I was on par to that of my hearing peers from grade 2 to 12, graduating at age 18, like everybody else, as a B/B+ student.
So, with that bit of synopsis of my life it should give you the idea that the non-use of ASL or signing does not mean that a child with a hearing loss will forever be shackled with problematic language development. In my case it was all auditory development done early enough that allowed my language to develop and flourish. I am thankful for my parents decision that got me where I am today.
Then your mother made the best decision she could have made as a parent, to ensure that you had opportunities. I, too, was mainstreamed and graduated in the top 20% of the class, with A/B grade average and went on to a hearing college for 3 years before I was exposed to sign language which influenced me to make the decision to go to NTID. I was shocked at the reading/writing grade levels the NTID students exhibited (I never took NTID’s English classes.) So I am thankful for my parents having made the “best” decision for me… also they were very involved in my education, which was one of the factors for my academic success (although not for social success, which I did not have during the mainstream years.)
Funny since you said you didn’t have much social success when I did. I was never shy about meeting and playing with hearing people when I was in school or in my neighborhood. I had just as much social enjoyment when I first went to Gallaudet University. Although the Honors Program was a bit of joke back then. Fortunately I was able to take consortium courses at George Washington University so I have something that’s challenging to do outside of Gallaudet University.
May I point out that there’s also a generation gap at play here? When my hearing nephews were growing up, my sisters and my mothers argued frequently about child-rearing techniques, especially discipline. My mom would always say, “Well, I raised you three girls doing [this], and you all came out fine!” And my sisters would always say, “Yes, I know, but I want to do it differently now.”
I see the same thing happening between the AVT and ASL camps. My observation is that AVT nowadays is a bit different from the old oralism methods of the old days, and that’s primarily due to advances in hearing technology, including cochlear implants. Having better access to audition makes a world of difference in the success or failure of AVT. What’s being done with deaf babies and toddlers today bears little resemblance to what was done with deaf children in the 40s, 50s, and 60s. Even general education nowadays is a lot different from educational methods of that era. Hearing kids in regular public schools were getting paddled and their hands hit with rulers too. I know it still happens today, but is no longer an accepted institutional practice.
I appreciated Karen Mayers’ points about how schools and medical facilities may attempt to wrest control of deaf children’s program planning from the parents. I recently had a conversation about that exact same thing with a famous Deaf radical who has both hearing and deaf children. She asked me, “Why does this school feel that they own my child, when my hearing kids’ schools don’t?” When I hear stories like that, it makes me realize that the so-called “experts” in schools can use their power against the parents’ better judgment, and not in good ways either, such as in a mediated dispute or fair hearing with the district.
Apart from the parents who are in jail, drug addicts, abusers, etc., most parents LOVE their children more than their own lives. It’s the love that motivates them to do their best for the child, not a political ideology. It’s the parents, not well-meaning others, who live with their child 24/7 and understand them intimately. Whether the parent espouses AVT or ASL, or something else, you can bet the budget that it’s because they made a reasoned decision based on the available facts, or even an educated guess, and from their close knowledge of the child. No, it isn’t possible for anyone to predict the future outcome of one’s parenting practice, hearing or deaf. That’s a specious argument if I ever heard one.
“Experts” on both sides are doing it to the parents. I read the blogs between Amy the Hearing Parent and her detractors, and was astounded by some of what I read from the ASL camp. Basically, a lot of pretty intelligent deaf people told her they didn’t believe her experience with the CI and AVT. They even said, “well, your child might be doing well right now, but how will he feel 20 years ago? I’ll tell you how he’ll feel. He will feel just like we do! After all, we are deaf. We KNOW!”
I too regret this polarization we’ve gotten into — the apples and oranges, all or nothing, AVT vs. ASL, either/or business. What I’d like to see happening is a permanent end to this “YOU’RE WRONG AND EVIL!” business. I fully empathize and respect that fact that many deaf individuals were in fact permanently harmed and victimized by the oralism practices of the past. But that’s what it is - the past. Because it was their experience does not mean it will be someone else’s experience too. Many deaf people were in fact helped by the oralist approach and do not regret their experience. Similarly, many deaf people educated bilingually became proficient, literate individuals.
How about saying, a range of different methods can work? It’s the parents’ job to determine which one fits their particular child best. Hopefully we, the deaf community, can make that task easier — not harder. It’s up to us to be kind, respectful, approachable and teach by our example.
Now see, this is what I’m looking for. I’ve seen a lot of responses coming closer to the middle (though some people do still hold onto their favored approach a bit, but this is to be expected, because bias is human) in this series than I have in a lot of other blogs. And CE, I agree with much of what you’re saying here but I do need to jump in on a few points. Please don’t get exasperated, okay? I honestly believe that it needs to be pointed out.
“Whether the parent espouses AVT or ASL, or something else, you can bet the budget that it’s because they made a reasoned decision based on the available facts, or even an educated guess, and from their close knowledge of the child.”
This one part, no. I don’t agree, because it’s once again an absolute. There are a range of parents. Michele Ketchum, for example, said in Part I of this series that she’s had experience with parents who are lazy and expect all information to be spoon fed to them. Why doubt her? I mean, if we can’t discount one parent’s experiences (”Amy” I think her name is–the one you were talking about) then why discount anyone else’s? Would you, for example, believe MY experiences? I worked in many inner city schools throughout the course of my career. Poverty, gang violence, general violence, drugs, etc were as much a part of the everyday scene as are swings in a city park. Many parents I knew of appeared to have simply gone with what was immediately available in terms of programs, because they had no means of sending their child elsewhere.
I made a point in another blog (I forget where) about the irony of many cities’ “feeder schools.” This at one time was true of Milwaukee and I believe it’s true of Fairfax County Public Schools… often what you’ll find are different elementary programs cartering to various ideologies… such as on elementary school with an oral program, one elementary school with a signing program, etc, yet by the high school level, these various elementary schools “feed” into one high school where all of these deaf students are placed side by side. Now I’m unsure of the reasons for this, but what you often saw were deaf students who couldn’t sign (because they were trained orally) and deaf students who couldn’t CUE (because they were trained in ASL) sitting right next to students who could ONLY CUE (this is more true of FCPS than it was of Milwaukee, but I left Milwaukee before CUEing really caught on, so I have no idea what happens to CUEers in Milwaukee now). My point is this… where ELSE are these parents supposed to send their kids to high school? You almost have to assume that several cities don’t have programs at the high school level that differentiate among the approaches used. With the budget for education being what it is, I don’t see how they can. So no matter how much research you do in some areas, you still end up facing limited choices in many areas. Maybe that doesn’t take away from the fact that someone has the final say, but it does impact upon the argument that what they wanted and what they got were two different things.
In any case it’s still all too easy to slice an absolute down to size. Several parents I’ve met didn’t really appear to care all that much about Deaf Ed issues. They were more worried about jobs, they were facing legal issues for unrelated problems, etc. What would you find if you went over to the public school system in Washington DC? And What’s the most readily available program for deaf students in the immediate DC area? Kendall. Several other programs are a ways out, and I think you have to be a resident of a given area to send your child to that school.
So you see it’s not always about parents doing the research. We don’t know that–we assume that. No doubt it’s not always a case of parents doing what’s easiest, either (in terms of relocation, etc). What I think is reasonable to assume is that there’s a range of parents. Some are much more concerned with other problems than they are with what program is best or best fits their child. It’s also quite possible that some parents don’t really care that much at all about those particular issues, though it need not necessarily follow that they’re abusive, or neglect their kids, etc.
Everything else you said, I’m pretty much down with. I’m just tired of absolutes. Absolutes do not accurately capture what we’re dealing with.
nicely stated, Chris. You’re absolutely correct that not only is there a range of parents (from very involved to benignly indifferent or lazy or whatever) and a range of program placements available in any geographical area and at any age. Whew! The parent’s job is even more complicated than we realize. Then there’s not only the deaf child’s needs to consider, but the needs of the other children and the parents themselves who, after all, have needs of their own, one of which is to earn a living to support their family. There’s also a range of situations relating to economics, psychological well-being, thinking ability, social and emotional support systems, interfacing with educators and medical advisors with their own biases, and all that. Families with deaf children deserve all the understanding and respect they can get from deaf adults and organizations.
No, I certainly hope I don’t discount anyone’s experiences, least of all yours. From your previous comments and blogs, you’ve worked for some pretty horrible deaf programs, and I’ve been fortunate to have worked for some of the very best deaf programs. I’ve also observed first-hand that “feeder” system, and the limited choices that parents have in many areas of the country. So our perspectives represent opposite, but converging ends of the spectrum. I met several families who moved, or considered moving, long distances to be able to enroll their child or children at my schools. That’s why I’m slanted toward absolutes like “most” families are motivated to do their best for their deaf child. Realistically, not every family has the resources to do this and no parent should be made to feel in the wrong for not having them.
Of all the possible choices, I wonder if learning ASL, going to a bilingual-bicultural residential school or day program, and joining the “D”eaf community represents the biggest major change a hearing family will have to make to meet the needs of their deaf child. To bring a deaf child and his/her hearing family into the deaf community, deaf adults would be well advised to extend a helping hand across the abyss of absolutism that separates us. In other words, it means setting aside personal biases and the “my way or the highway” thinking and saying “we’re all in this together” instead. In the deaf world today, we have the CUEers, ASLers, CIs, AVTs, Bi-Bi’s, oralists, talkers, signers, NAD members, and AGB members. Everyone counts, and all voices/signs can be heard and seen. I’m all for passionate idealism myself, but aim to persuade rather than bulldoze with my beliefs.
CE, interesting take. But you state, “In other words, it means setting aside personal biases and the “my way or the highway” thinking…” in reference to Deaf people. I agree, but it also applies to oralists as well. If you want to say that there should be no absolutes, then both sides are going to have to accept and understand their part in all this, and so should the people entering this dialogue. A lot of why ASL users have problems with oralists is because many oralists have this “my way or the highway” attitude. So I think for any progress to be achieved in a dialogue and in finding solutions that work, BOTH sides need to abandon the absolutist rhetoric.
Well-said, David. CE, I have to agree. For example, DeafDC has this persistent anti-ASL bias in the comments sections in many of its entries. (The blog entries themselves are pretty varied.) BOTH sides, as David puts it, are going to need to show ability to dialogue and listen to each other.
Well, I must say that DeafDC has been showing BOTH sides, more than DeafRead… sure there are some deaf people who are uncomfortable with ASL (I won’t say anti-, because it seems too hostile to me. So, it is more of the comfort level.)
Correct, KM.
Curious Eyes,
You say parents are with children 24/7 and understand them intimately - Sorry, but this is a myth or a fallacy. It is my experience that vast majority of them don’t. It is often the school that know their children better than they do thus why we assert in assessing and evaluating what is the best fit for them. A hearing and a deaf child are different. Parents understand their hearing children therefore there is no struggle over the child in the public school. A deaf child is a whole different story. They know their child as their biological family member, their little habits, routines, some aspects of their personalities, sure, but beyond that, often it’s the reality that they really don’t know their children. It is the ignornace, communication barriers, emotional barriers, and ideologies that separate the parents and deaf children. The deaf education people see that all the time and are in better position to represent the deaf children in the decision - making process thus why it is the IEP team that has the final say in the deaf child’s education.
Amy Rowley’s case is a good example of parents trying to assert decision making powers - but the reason for taking the case to U.S. Supreme Court is not directly related to educational process but services - the school district paying for interpreter. The parents have the right to make requests, have the rights to appeal, etc, but not the final say. Most of the time IEP complies to parental choices. Seldomly do they oppose parents and assert that their choices are not appropriate for their children. Most IEP teams are more interested in working together and building relationships.
We have to expect some parents who fight for control and disagree with the philosophy or opinions of the school or individual IEP team members, but this is actually seldom. It is more often that IEP team allows the parents do what they think is right for their children, and in most cases, they pull out the child out of their school and enroll them elsewhere. Rarely will some IEP teams appeal their decision to enroll the child elsewhere if the team truly believe the other school is inappropriate placement for the child - again, this is rare. They are far likely to let go and allow the parents do what they think is best.
Cy’s response is the most accurate response yet in terms of blunt reality, in my opinion. It doesn’t mean that ALL parents are mean or abusive (Cy didn’t say this but others have in other blogs) or hopelessly ignorant. It just means that there’s a range.
Thank you Cy, this very closely captures other messages I’m trying to communicate.
Whoa! Excuse me, Chris, but Cy’s comment smacks of absolutism to me. She said: You say parents are with children 24/7 and understand them intimately - Sorry, but this is a myth or a fallacy. It is my experience that vast majority of them don’t. It is often the school that know their children better than they do thus why we assert in assessing and evaluating what is the best fit for them.
As a professional working in a school for the deaf, I’m appalled by the suggestion that an institution could know a child better than the parents do. (I know some deaf children come from homes with no direct communication with the parents during all of the child’s life. Those aren’t the families I’m thinking of. I’m speaking of families that have some communication and interaction with their deaf kids, whether through speech, hearing, ASL, other sign systems, writing, or a combination.)
But perhaps I don’t have all the information I need to better interpret your claim. Cy, could you tell me more about your background and where your knowledge comes from? I’d like to understand.
But Cy qualified by saying “it is my experience.” That moves the absolute from something that is universally true to a range of something that is true for exactly for one person.
However I can perhaps expand upon that field a bit. I too have seen cases in which a parent had expectations which several teachers agreed could not be met with the resources they had (and in a few cases the teachers privately agreed the parent’s expectations were in part based on denial). Were they right or wrong? Not my point. Did they decide this and work to curb the parents expectations? Yes. So several of my experiences match Cy’s.
CE, if I could add, quickly, however, you also qualify your statement by saying:
“(I know SOME deaf children come from homes with no direct communication with the parents during all of the child’s life. Those aren’t the families I’m thinking of. I’m speaking of families that have some communication and interaction with their deaf kids, whether through speech, hearing, ASL, other sign systems, writing, or a combination.)”
So I also see where you’re coming from… because that statement too steers clear of absolutes.
I am a teacher like yourself. I come from a deaf family, and my father was also a teacher. Combined teaching experience between my father and myself is extensive. Parents like to think they know their children better than the school but a lot of time it is simply not true. Ignorance plays a lot into myth or fallacy. Simply because parents raised children the first 3-5 years of their children’s lives doesnt mean they know their children. We are the professionals, combined with our training, expertise and experience, we are better able to evaluate, assess, anmd assert what is best fit for the individual child. Evvery child has two sides: the home persona and school persona. Families know the home persona which often has nothing to do with the school persona and ultimately their education and language acquisition. Therein lay the ignorance. Communication and emotional barriers are large factors - emotional in that parents want to see their children as what they want to see - the school present the reality.
CE,
There is no absolutes - it is simply a vast majority - naturally there are seldom cases where parents are realistic about their children and makes easier for the IEP team to coordiate their children’s education in their best interests. IEP team is motiviated to bujild good relationships with parents and are loathe to alienate them. They find ways to educate the parents and such to maintain an even keel on the dynamics of the IEP team. My school has IEP Specialist and that is a tough job.
Actually, I kind of agree with Cy. Sometimes *neither* the school nor the parents really know the child. Communication issues can impede parents from really getting to know their deaf child(ren), and teachers/educators don’t always have the time to get to know their pupils beyond their academic achievements, or lack thereof.
Besides, do parents go to school with their children? If they do, then yep, they’re with them “24/7.” Often, they’re not. They get information about the educational experience filtered through what they hear from the teachers and from their kids (if the kids choose to share).
I will readily admit that this is true for hearing children as well. Each of us undergoes our own experiences in live. We each have individual experiences, memories, and reactions. Hearing or deaf, parents, teachers, relatives, and others have only so much influence and guidance they can give. It’s why you have some very successful people from the worst families, and why your Uncle Fred is the “black sheep” in an otherwise unimpeachable family.
This really boils down to one of the main points a lot of deaf people have about the debate over language and communication: to truly understand deafness, you have to be deaf yourself. No amount of “expertise” can counteract that. While this doesn’t mean that Deaf/deaf people thus should have the final word, it does mean that what we have to say should not be discounted whatsoever.
David,
You made good points here. True, neither the school nor the parents know the child better than the other. It’s on ly the personas they present in certain environment from which either side process information about the child, anf from academic and language perspective, it would be the school who “knows” the child better. Thus why it is so essential for the IEP teams to work together and coordinate educational planning for their children.
Correct… I learned a lot from IEP meetings. I am bemused that oftentimes the IEP teams have never met the child, but only through the paperworks and the school representatives (in this case, often teachers.) It is important that parents have working relationships with the child/children’s teachers to ensure the academic success and to be knowledgeable about the state’s academic standards (Indiana has the academic standards, but the towns/cities in Indiana usually “enrich” the basic academic standards to strive for the best. Where I live, Carmel, IN, the expectations of the public schools’ academic success are higher than the schools of the city of Indianapolis, for an example.) I don’t believe in the “good enuff” attitude which I see at some deaf schools (and at some hearing schools, I am sure.)
AND… of course, be willing to accept the child’s limitations, to respect the teachers’ boundaries, etc. I cringe when I hear the stories of how parents come to clash with the teachers. Cy is right… often children spend more time with the teachers than with the parents who are usually working. I always inform the teachers of my children that I respect them more because they spend more time with my children and to feel free to share any concerns and new developments with me. When we sign IEP paperwork, we give power to the schools to do what they think is right for our children.
Karen,
I commend you for being involved with your child’s life, open to learning new things that can help improve your knowledge about your rights as a parent, and how this in turn instills your child to learn and become empowered.
Alot of the comments here offer varying opinions and frankly at a glance, they are all right in addition to your own.
What happens at the IEP meeting can be scary for a parent, especially if they are not aware of their own rights and responsibilities. Getting the right information can be equally as frustrating. However, once a parent is armed with the right info, knows their rights and responsibilities, they become empowered to advocate for their child. There is nothing more inspiring than seeing a parent go to bat for their child against a school district!
Through the past 25 years, I have given workshops to parents (both deaf and hearing), called, “The IEP: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly”. With me was another parent, Peggy Tranovich, and an advocate, Coleen Ashly, and we would role play the different scenarios of IEP to discuss with parents about what they have experienced and tips for empowering them with knowledge about their rights.
IEP’s can be a real opressive experience for parents. As you first started to explain, you feel the state owns your child not you. Every state has their version of the federal law, and every state is supposed to dissemminate to parents their rights and responsibilities, and explain it at the IEP. Often parents do not realize they have the power to ask questions, to request a specific curriculum, placement, and services. The schools do not always willingly give out this information. Parent education has been eliminated from state budgets everywhere, which is part of the problem here. If this was a mandatory required service, educating parents, things would be different.
My understanding of what John Egbert was talking about has more to do with the parent, especially new ones, do not always get full information and the reason they don’t depends on the school, because the bottom line is always about money. They dont want to send children to a state school, or a specific service is because they dont want to pay. It is always about money.
Lastly, raising the bar of academic achievement, closing the gaps, higher standards, requires a complete educational reform in Deaf education.
Always remember, No one owns your child, no one knows your child better than YOU. The more you become involved with education issues, learn and use your parental rights, the more you will feel YOU are in control.
Don’t let anyone ever tell you otherwise.
Your child is lucky to have you so involved and caring, enough to learn more.
Thanks for being you.
Curious Eyes,
I’d like to focus on one point you made, which is that many deaf adults were saying they didn’t believe Amy. I’m in full agreement with what you’re generally saying - we need to reach out and work with hearing parents instead of drawing a line in the sand here, crossing our arms, and insisting they hie themselves across the line. However, I can completely understand the skepticism many showed toward Amy’s claims. After all, how many intake forms have I read for new students (compiled using reports from the local school district) that show the student was functioning at a level far higher than what *our* testing and observations show? I’ve also seen parents completely stunned at what our results show because they coulda SWORN that their kid was performing at a totally different level, including parents who have some communication with their child. And I know I’m not alone in this observation, based on discussions I’ve had with many people. So, while we cannot gauge Amy’s sons’ abilities and make assumptions without direct observation, I personally can completely relate to the skepticism many people feel about her claims.
Note I’m steering WAY clear of absolutes here. Everything here comes from personal experience, observation, and discussion. *grin*
Hi Jenny: that’s an experience I’ve had too. And I’ve also met parents and teachers who were totally realistic about their children’s functioning level. More than once, I’ve sat in an IEP where a deaf high schooler was reading at a 2nd grade level and the parents are still talking about them going to college or catching up to grade level in a matter of 2 or 3 years. Arggghh. I have to sit on my hands not to shout, “Get a freaking clue, people!”
Amy the Hearing Parent was pretty convincing when she maintained that her born-deaf son talks on the phone, communicates orally with ease, and for all intents and purposes functions as would a hearing child. I’m not saying she has to be telling the truth about that. What bothers me is going beyond mere skepticism and basically accusing her of lying. As if, because it isn’t within our direct personal experience or anyone else we know, that a truly happy, functioning oral child cannot possibly exist. If it doesn’t fit with one’s life experiences, ideology or bias, it just can’t be true. If I was raised orally and suffered emotional pain, adverse consequences, and oppression, including limited language or literacy because of it, then other people will only experience that too; based on my experience, it̵